Access to nature: what to do when both sides are right?
As we analyse the data from our access to nature survey, which received over 1,000 responses from farmers, landowners, partners and the general public, we mull over this nuanced and increasingly hot topic.
The public discourse on the impacts and rights of what can be included under the umbrella term ‘access to nature’ is rumbling on in newspapers and across social media. Kate Humble commented recently in The Times about the importance of being able to manage access to certain parts of the countryside at certain times in the interest of both farming and conservation. Equally, bestselling writer and landowner Isabella Tree told The Guardian that mediating the impacts of public access was now a key focus of the work at Knepp, at odds with the stance of campaigner Guy Shrubsole, the most prominent voice in the Right to Roam campaign.
According to research by Natural England, 50% of us are spending more time outside since the pandemic. But this has been accompanied by news stories highlighting the negative consequences of increased visitor numbers such as litter problems at Loch Lomond or sewage discharges at Lake Windermere.
We need access to nature but what’s the ecological impact?
We all benefit from interacting with our shared natural heritage. And improving access to nature – from local park to National Park – will further facilitate this. Yet our engagement has ecological impact; from dogs disturbing ground nesting birds to increased road traffic to soil compaction on popular paths. As ecologists work towards gaining a better understanding of the impact on ecosystems, so social scientists, psychologists and health professionals are establishing the physical and mental benefits of spending time with the diverse species with whom we share this world.
The election of a new government adds a further dynamic. In October 2023, the Labour Party walked back on their previous intention to introduce a Scottish style ‘Right to Roam’ across England. In its place, they have indicated an openness to looking at ways towards updating the Countryside and Rights of Way Act. This piece of legislation, published in 2000, makes it legal for people in England and Wales to access upland and uncultivated land. How this will play out in practice remains to be seen. What is sure, though, is that ecologists and conservation practitioners should be consulted to ensure that both access and protection can be reconciled. The situation in Scotland is already very different given the freedom to roam introduced by the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003.
Yet south of the border access remains a thorny issue. Last year, the BES’s English Policy Group hosted an event at our London HQ which brought together experts offering diverse perspectives. This was followed by the launch of a public survey in the autumn, which attracted over 1,000 respondents. The data illustrates the depth of feeling this subject rouses. Yet, despite the many strong and polarised responses we received, a large number of respondents recognised and reflected on the complexities of these questions.
Experts, engagement and collaboration
What has emerged from our work convening ecologists and canvassing opinion, is a belief that these complexities can be worked through. The answers to reconciling these objectives lies in education, collaboration and well-resourced institutions. This in turn will require engagement and outreach with both the public and land managers, as well as expert inputs and planning from ecologists and conservationists. This survey data will provide the foundation for a BES policy brief on the topic coming soon.
It won’t be easy. For example, the question of dogs and dog walkers comes up again and again and is an increasingly recognised but thorny ecological talking point. Enhanced access to nature for people cannot also mean a bro ader presence of dogs beyond their owner’s control. This is borne out in ecological evidence ranging from impacts on coastal birds to the presence of flea treatments in aquatic habitats. Yet, of course, recreational outdoor access is a key part of life for Britain’s millions of dog owners.
What is clear, however, is that ecological sensitivity varies across habitats in a way which means engaging ecologists and conservation groups in efforts to expand public access to nature will be vital in the future.
What do you think? Get in touch with us at policy@britishecologicalsociety.org
Like what we stand for?
Support our mission and help develop the next generation of ecologists by donating to the British Ecological Society.